I needed to google "Discovery Institute "Wedge Document.""
to understand your comments.

I have not read the rebuttal, but speaking as an atheist I would say that the ID/creationists cannot be dismissed by any appeal to straight "logic", nor do most "scientists" understand the nature of "belief" which they unconsciously apply to their axioms.

Reference to Wittgenstein, Kuhn and Capra would perhaps more usefully lead to an inderstanding of "what science is" and implications of terms like "materialism". IMO, "purposeful creationism" of any flavour is merely an attempt at psychological closure against the the void of an ontological infinite regress.